Larry Pickering who ripped off $15million in a betting software scam claims to be investigating Julia Gillard for the AWU fraud scam.

Larry Pickering is well-known for being a fraudster, scam artist and con man who’s latest scam cost people an estimated $15 million. Pickering refuses to answer questions on the matter except for a basic denial. This is the guy who claims he is investigating Julia Gillard in the AWU fraud scam from the 1990’s.

The reality is that Larry Pickering is working his next scam and a lot of suckers are being drawn in and even a few in the media. The real danger here is that the only thing going for Julia Gillard is Larry Pickering. It gives Julia Gillard an easy way out of the mess as she can just refer to the lies and sleaze, Gillard being pregnant and having an abortion and being a lesbian, in Pickering’s reporting and his own dodgy background in running scams.

I flagged this 4 weeks ago in a post and also said that Pickering was full of lies and that I would be doing another post on him (Click here to read the post) The sleaze factor in Pickering’s reporting will turn a lot of people off and his lies blur everything. This is already happening, on Friday a main stream reporter with News Ltd, Peter van Onselen, referred to Pickering as a reason of why he will not report on the Gillard AWU fraud. (Click here to read)

Over the last couple of months Mr Pickering has been doing posts on his Facebook page and his website and another he set up about a month ago. A lot of the content of the posts are sleazy sexual innuendo and have no relevance to the AWU fraud and the posts are full of lies. In an interview on 3aw with Derryn Hinch in the last few days Mr Pickering admitted he was using a creative license in the posts and “adding color” as he said. So where the lies stop and truth begins no one knows. But below we will have a look at some of the lies.

A couple of months ago he claimed he was threatened with banning from Facebook in relation to a post he did on Julia Gillard and the AWU, for which he blames Gillard and he claims his new website has come under attack, which at the time of writing this is currently down.

There are a number of problems with Mr Pickering’s claims. Firstly, why have no other sites been attacked or threatened? This website and others have been reporting on Julia Gillard and the AWU fraud since last year and have never had a problem. (Click here to read the posts) If he was threatened by Facebook in relation to a story he did on Julia Gillard and the AWU why has he been able to publish numerous other stories on Facebook on the same topic which are a lot more disgusting than the first one?

In one post Pickering says this “The mainstream Press won’t touch this for fear of Gillard’s retribution. She has made that open and clear. I have been warned not to persist with this story. I told them to get f*****d so I fully expect to get bashed myself now, but little do the union hoods know who I know. Good luck boys! Do you want my address?”

It sounds like a b-grade movie script and why has no one else been threatened, just Mr Pickering? The banning and threats and attacks on his sites have been going viral on Twitter, Facebook, online forums and email which makes a lot of good free advertising which helps explain Mr Pickering’s lies. To tell people his sites are under attack is nothing more than an advertising strategy.

But let’s have a look at Mr Pickering’s scamming history first.

How the Larry Pickering scam worked.

Mr Pickering’s $15 million betting scam was done through a company called Cohen Strachan Investments. As you will see in the video below Mr Pickering refused to answer questions when A Current Affair tried to interview him in October 2011. He just stayed in his house and would not come out to be interviewed. Pickering had other people appointed as the directors but he was the man who owned it. Larry Pickering worked at the company himself and used the name Paul Perry when he was trying to sell to investors.

.

In the video Mr Pickering refuses to answer questions in relation to allegations that he was involved in a major fraud involving millions of dollars. Yet he does a big song and dance about Julia Gillard refusing to answer questions. In the video ACA cut back to a previous story done years ago where Larry Pickering admits being involved in a previous scam selling software that predicts winners in horse races. So why did he get involved in another scam. He has been doing the scams for years. Google Larry Pickering scam or Larry Pickering fraud and you will see.

Mr Pickering told News Ltd in relation to his involvement it’s “not true” “I don’t know where all this comes from” “It is rubbish.” But Pickering did admit that he helped set up Cohen Strachan Investments (CSI) 5 years ago. (Click here to read the article) Sounds familiar doesn’t it? Julia Gillard set up the organisation that her then partner Bruce Wilson used to funnel money through but Gillard says she did not know what the account was used for. The only thing left for Pickering to do is claim he was “young and naive” like Julia Gillard has when he set up CSI. He would have been 64 years old at the time so it would be a bit rich to claim he was young and naive but knowing Pickering that will not stop him.

Lies in the Pickering Posts

About two months ago it was reported that Pickering was banned for three days for putting a pornographic picture of Julia Gillard on Facebook. This is probably true and was reported by News Ltd. although they did not give all the graphic details like the strap-on Gillard was wearing in his cartoon (Click here to read) A few days later Pickering did a post on one of his websites about Julia Gillard closing down the reporting of her past. It looked like a summarised version of a post I did last year titled “Has Julia Gillard blackmailed the Media to cover-up her corrupt past? The Fairfax Media and News Corp scandal.” (Click here to read my post)

Pickering modified the post a number of times as he gained more information but it came to my attention early on as Pickering started saying he was threatened with banning from Facebook for putting the article on Facebook and the emails started going about the so-called threat and one landed in my inbox. I knew straight away it was suspicious. I looked at the post and it was full of lies. For example he wrote:

“News Ltd CEO, John Hartigan, resigned in disgust. Milne and Smith were sacked. Andrew Bolt was told to drop it. Radio commentators were warned to stay away. Blogs were spiked, stories pulled.”

No blogs were ever spiked. This site has always been up and this is the site that got the ball rolling last year. Other sites that have since reported on it have never been spiked. Andrew Bolt did pull down a couple of posts but that is it. And John Hartigan never resigned in disgust. It was his decision to stop News Ltd reporting on Julia Gillard’s past so why would he resign in disgust? From his own decision? Hartigan did resign but not until a few months later in November last year when Rupert Murdoch was in town. It was well-known and reported he was sacked and one of the reasons was because he buckled to Julia Gillard and closed down the reporting of her past. (Click here to read Pickering’s post)

Pickering goes on to say “An exposure of this was the threat that Gillard used against the then News Ltd CEO, John Hartigan, to kill the Wilson story.”

“A reliable source said Gillard was ‘incandescent’ with rage when she stormed into News Ltd Offices, after initially resorting to sobbing.”

Does anyone in this country really believe that Gillard would cry over something like this. She is tough as nails. And there was no storming of the News Ltd offices by her. The closing down of the reporting was done over the phone between her and John Hartigan and the editor of The Australian Chris Mitchell which I reported on. Pickering makes everything up and lies all over the place.

Sleaze in the Pickering posts

In one post titled “THE STORY GILLARD TRIED TO KILL” Pickering writes:

A cold shiver went up Gillard’s spine when she saw a recent cartoon depicting her as being pregnant to AWU fraudster, Bruce Wilson.

Not that a pregnancy, or even a termination at seven weeks, is significant. Her real concern was: If that is known, what the hell else is known?

What sort of sick person even writes that let alone draws a picture trying to make a joke of it. I heard the rumour six months ago and did not touch it. Who knows if it is true and even if it is true it is none of our business. If Julia Gillard had raised it then it is open for comment, but she has not nor would I expect her to. But even if she did raise it you do not make a joke of it in a cartoon like Pickering has.

What if Pickering did that to your mother or sister. What Pickering has done is taken the story of the AWU fraud into the gutter which will disgust most people.

On other posts Pickering says things like “It was a warm Sunday morning in Fitzroy in late 1992.

Bill Shorten and his lover Nicola Roxon had struggled out of bed late and were heading up Brunswick Street for breakfast when Bill noticed a couple they knew having coffee opposite.

They waved, crossed the road, and sat down with Julia Gillard and Bruce Wilson. The conversation concerned no more than the weather but Julia was overtly gesticulating with her left hand. It bore a sizable stone in a white gold ring. “You guys are engaged!” exclaimed Bill. Julia blushed. Nicola looked askance at Bruce.

Julia was excited, in love, and it showed. But Nicola was aware that Bruce was bedding a number of other women, and it showed too, as she lowered her head and glared at Wilson. Wilson was known in AWU circles as “Wilson the Rooter”.”

It sounds like some Mills and Boon novel. Pickering is making a joke of the whole thing. He also says in another post “Gillard openly experimented sexually with other women but her main calling was to men.” What has that got to do with the AWU fraud? Nothing. And where is the evidence?

With Pickering it is sex, sex and sex. It makes a mockery of the whole investigation that serious people are currently conducting and helps turn people off from the story.

The below picture helps understand Larry Pickering’s depravity and why he gets off on smut talk.

Larry Pickering

You might find the above photo disgusting but that is the point. No matter how disgusting you find it, what Mr Pickering has written and the drawing he did of Julia Gillard pregnant is a lot more disgusting. Where Mr Pickering was when the photo was taken I do not know. Maybe Mr Pickering would like to explain. It is a screen grab from the ACA story which is above.

Larry Pickering’s plagiarism – Mike Smith interviews with Alan Jones

Pickering plagiarised an interview that Mike Smith did with Alan Jones. Pickering did a post about 12 hours after the interview and said “Revelations exposed in The Pickering Post last week have been verified by sacked radio host, Michael Smith, to 2GB’s Alan Jones this morning.” and he then went on to rip off the whole interview as his own. The man will do anything.

Larry Pickering says he is working with Peter Faris QC

In the interview that Pickering did with Derryn Hinch s few days ago he says he is dealing with Peter Faris QC. I phoned Peter Faris to ask if this was true. He said he was not working or dealing with Pickering and it was not true what Pickering said. Peter Faris said he is working with Harry Nowicki who is writing a book about the AWB fraud. (Click here to listen to the interview)

Some questions for Larry Pickering

1. Who did you help to set up Cohen Strachan Investments?

2. Why did you set up CSI given that you had already set up scam years ago which you admitted on ACA?

3. An accountant, a former employee, a private investigator and numerous investors say you pretended to be Paul Perry and worked and owned CSI. Why do you deny this?

4. It says in the News Ltd report “He was made an undischarged bankrupt in August last year by his former de facto’s father George Luckardt” Why did he make you a bankrupt?

5. Why would you not answer questions or be interviewed by ACA?

6. How can you afford your lifestyle of an expensive house and car given you are a bankrupt?

7. Who threatened you to stop reporting on the Julia Gillard AWU fraud?

Of course I will have more follow-up questions once Mr Pickering answers the above. Maybe Derryn Hinch would like to put the above questions to Pickering.

QLD Police and why they have not charged Mr Pickering

Detective Superintendent Brian Hay Qld Police Fraud Squad

Detective Superintendent Brian Hay is head of the Queensland Police Fraud Squad and a quick search of Google says he is a real media tart. He loves getting his head on TV and in the papers. He just doesn’t seem very good at doing his job. In the ACA show it says the police had done nothing even though they had a 250 report from the private investigator and many complaints for about six months. It is now well over a year and my understanding is they still have not done anything. So much so that Pickering who has been running the scams for years is still getting around and attracting attention to himself.

A quick google search corrupt QLD police came up with this “Queensland police tied to major drug trafficking” which starts off “THE biggest corruption scandal since the Fitzgerald inquiry, with claims of police in major drug trafficking, is set to rock the force.” “The allegations centre on the Gold Coast and are believed to concern some members of the Queensland Police Service”. Pickering lives on the Gold Coast so it might help explain why he has been able to get away with running scams for years if the local coppers are corrupt. (Click her to read)

Julia Gillard’s involvement in the AWU fraud is gathering pace in the media and elsewhere. Mike Smith is investigating and has done two interviews on the Alan Jones show recently, Robert McClelland mentioned her involvement in parliament recently, Hedley Thomas from The Australian has started reporting on the matter (Click here to read), The West Australian has done a story on it yesterday (Click here to read), Ralph Blewitt who was involved with the fraud is prepared to give statements to the police if he is given immunity, a Melbourne lawyer, Harry Nowicki, is writing a book on the matter and then add all the bloggers who have been writing about the matter.

Larry Pickering has added nothing to the investigation. More people are turned of by his sleaze and lies then who support him. Pickering’s habit of name dropping of who he is working with and spoken to drags them in with him and discredits them with his lies and sleaze.

What Pickering is up to who knows. The most likely he is building up a following of gullible people who would believe his dribble, the latest being site was under attack and has been taken down. Why have no other websites been taken down or attacked? Maybe the police somewhere are hot on his trail and he is getting all political so if he is charged he will claim is politically motivated. Maybe he is working for Labor. As I have said it gives Julia Gillard and easy out and one person in the media has already used the Pickering defence.But I suppose all will be revealed eventually.

But just remember if you support Pickering you are helping Julia Gillard because we have a person who refuses to answer questions in relation to a $15 million fraud claiming to be investigating Julia Gillard who was involved in a $1 million fraud. I have promoted many websites and bloggers on this site via links in my posts and would have been happy to promote Pickering. But he is nothing more than a common criminal.

I have set up a dedicated page for the Julia Gillard – Bruce Wilson AWU Fraud which is above on the menu bar which I will update when further information comes to hand. Please use that to put links to other reports. (Click here to go to the page)

Update: There is a story on the SMH site today which points to Pickering and discredits him thereby helping Julia Gillard. (Click here to read) It looks like it has well and truly started. Gillard has also issued a statement on denial again today. (Click here to read)

Update: Julia Gillard on Sky News refusing to answer questions on the AWU fraud matter. Worth watching to see her duck and weave on the questions. (Click here to watch)

Update: Michael Pascoe in the SMH has done a story today titled “Larry Pickering – the conman stalking Gillard” He references this website. (Click here to read)

Update 16/6/2013: The Age have run a story titled “Pickering faces new evidence over failed scheme” (Click here to read)

Please use the Twitter, Facebook and email etc. buttons below and help promote this post.

And make sure you follow this site by email which is on the top right of this page and about once a week you will get an email when there is a new post on this site.

This website is independent and reliant on donations to keep publishing. If you would like to support the continuance of this site please click on the button below to donate via PayPal or go to the donations page for other donation options (Click here to go to the Donations page)

I have written about Julia Gillard’s criminality a lot. Pickering has added nothing expect lies and sleaze which helps Gillard get out of it. The media was already building without Pickering. Where was Pickering last year when all this started? He has jumped on the bandwagon for his own benefit and will undermine everyone else.

Disinformation in action Straw-man style. They seek to discredit the whole story by putting the focus onto the reputation of the person telling the story. Out goes the baby AND the bathwater. Simple. I wonder if Pickering is actually in on this whole charade. I doubt he cares much about reputation.

HOW DARE YOU SAY SHE IS A COMMON CRIMINAL THIS MORNING PETER VAN ONSELEN TOLD VIEWERS (WHO PAY TO WATCH THE PROGRAM I MIGHT ADD) IT WAS JUST A BEAT UP AND IN HIS OPINION GILLARD IS INNOCENT OF WRONG DOING. SO THERE YOU HAVE IT SHE HAS BE CLEARED BY A JOURNALIST ( A PROFESSOR ) YES IT IS ALL DONE AND DUSTED SHE HAS BEEN CLEARED.
ALSO THERE WAS A SMALL MATTER OF THE PM BEING BRIEFED ON QUESTIONS WHICH WERE GOING TO BE PUT. PAUL KELLY WAS INSULTED AND HUMILITATED BY GILLARD IT WOULD APPEAR THERE IS A LABOR MOLE IN THE NEWS ROOM.
THIS WOMAN IS DANGEROUS, THIS IS A MONUMENTAL SCANDEL YET SHE WAS IN TOTAL CONTROL OF THE INTERVIEW.
SHE WAS NOT ASKED WHY THE UWA CASE WAS OFF FILE.
I HAVE SPOKEN TO A FEW PEOPLE THIS AM AND THEY ARE ALL THINKING OF CANCELLING THEIR SUBCRIPTION TO FOX NEWS AND BUSINESS.
I ALSO THINK THE PRESS COUNCIL SHOULD QUESTION PETER VAN ONSELEN REGARDING HIS COMMENT’S ON GILLARD’S INNOCENCE.
AND HIS INSULT REGARDING VIEWER’S EMAILS
QUITE FRANKLY I THINK VAN ONSELEN IS A DISGRACE.
I WILL CANCEL MY SUBSCRIPTION I DO NOT WISH TO LISTEN TO
OUTRAGEOUS BIASED DRIVEL.

I cancelled also, although I had to ask a solicitor to cancel it, as they were not going to cancel it at my request, so good luck.
In regard to the report of the interview with Peter van Onselen and Paul Kelly,that is what Ms gillard does, she insults the interviewer (Paul Kelly) sits on her high horse, but manages to never answer a question. She is an expert at this. I have never experienced such a person, who is Prime Minister and so dangerous.
The correct way to go about this, is for her to step down, while these sleazy questions have to be asked and replied to, we should not have to put up with a PM like this, It is an insult to the people of Australia.
Peter van Onselen may be a professor, but is an utter disgrace.

Hmm, “done and dusted” is not correct Furious as Peter Van Onselen is a professor of journalism and has his doctorate in political science; he just made a comment about Gillard and that hardly “clears” her – I think it was fair enough that she turned up but she is pretty angry about the matter being brought up at all. Pickering has a very muddy past but one has to wonder why his website was taken down – off to Siberia with him? People subscribe to Foxtel and Sky News is one channel they can watch amongst many so no-one pays to watch Van Onselen at all.

There is more to the Gillard saga with Slater and Gordon to come out and this site started the snowball.

Furios, I have not watched the ABC or Sky News, or Spiers and his offsider, Gilbert for months. Outrageous only goes part of the way of discribing van Onselen. Scandalous and corrupt would be more appropriate.

All these idiots are doing is helping to galvanise the coming armageddon. Not just Labors armageddon, but the rout of the main stream media.

I find this information very disturbing. What can Gillard do about it? The Australian runs the same information about Gillard’s past. I suppose we have to treat all persons on their true merits, or otherwise.

I agree that L.P.’s page is rather distasteful, I thought when he mentioned Peter Faris, he was on the level, but if that is untrue, that is it.
I read that you have written to all the embassy’s and had no reply, well that would be right, you will not receive any replies, however, do not worry all that information will be passed on, that is automatic, she will not be highly regarded overseas, and elsewhere.

that may be true that pickering is adding his poetic licence to the stories. BUt the underlying story here is that there are very very serious allegations levelled against the PRIME MINISTER OF AUSTRALIA. the manner in which th PM answers these allegations tell us that she is guilty as charged. If it was untrue the PM WOULD HAVE INSTITUTED PROCEEDINGS A LONG TIME AGO. it is still not late to proceed but the PM is scarred because if she does she will be in the dock and will DEFINATELY inciminate herself. The truth about her past dealings including the use of union money will show and that alone will bring her down. But in saying this the PM has a MORAL OBLIGATION to tell the public the truth. what happend 17 years ago is very relevant today because she is THE PM, a public figure. if the pm WANTS to make a case that things that happened 17 years ago is IRRELAVANT today then why are the police still investigating cases that happened 50 ago. THe pm for the sake of confidence and stability reallyMUST step down and start a forensic investigation today. she should not worry because she is NOT GUILTY according to her. Tony Morkbel too said that he was not guilty and so did Idi Amin and robert Mugabe and Clinton and monica but when an investigation commences the the truth surfaces. the PM owes australians a full explanation.

SHE HAS ACCESS TO THE MOST ABLE AND EXPENSIVE LAWYERS IN AUSTRALIA. YET ANYONE CAN INSULT HER AND ACCUSE HER OF CORRUPTION AND SHE DOES NOTHING, BIZZARE TRULY BIZZARE.
YOU CAN RUN JOOLYA BUT YOU CANNOT HIDE.
GETTING RID OF RUDD WAS THE BIGGEST BLUNDER THE LABOR PARTY HAS MADE AND BELIEVE ME JOOLYA YOU HAVE MORTAL ENEMIES DETERMINED TO EXPOSE THE TRUTH NO MATTER HOW LONG IT TAKES.

Shane, this post is not up to your usual standard. You suggest that ” a lot of suckers are being drawn in ” but by publishing it you concede the same of yourself!

You write “Peter van Onselen referred to Pickering as a reason of why he will not report on the Gillard AWU fraud” but today Van Onselen has taken quite a hit himself over this. Andrew Bolt sums up Van O quite well for mine.
Bolt: two passages in Julia Gillard’s interview today with Paul Kelly and Peter van Onselen on the AWU scandal may have profound implications for the reputation of some in the media business.

The first:

Julia Gillard: Well, and this is the issue, isn’t it? Because I understand you’re being asked to ask questions today.

Who did tell Gillard or her staff that Kelly had been asked to ask about the AWU scandal? I suspect Kelly would very much like to know.

Second:

Peter van Onselen: Can I just ask one question on this and then we’ll move on. Last question. Why not just put it all out there? I believe you that you did nothing wrong. I made a comment on Friday on my show “The Contrarians” that I thought this is all a beat up and we should move on to the major issues. But why not just address it straight down the barrell so that we can move on and all of this scuttlebutt that goes on online, which frankly I’m sick of people emailing me about this, we can just move on from it.

JG: Well, Peter, let me welcome but also question your grand naivety.

Bolt concludes:
It is not for any real journalist to absolve a politician completely before bothering even to properly check what it is he’s ticking off on. Grand naivety puts it mildly.

Well read the Andrew Bolt link in my post where he says “Yesterday on The Contrarians, host Peter van Onselen angrily attacked viewers who’d asked him why he’d never discussed this scandal. He bizarrely dismissed it as just the obsession of cartoonist Larry Pickering, and said nothing new had been revealed that serious commentators could or would comment on. He announced he certainly wouldn’t be asking any questions about the scandal when Julia Gillard appeared on his show, Australian Agenda, tomorrow”

I did read it and it changes nothing. Bolt again:
“As for van Onselen, who on Friday declared on air the Labor spin that this was just old news, peddled by Pickering and ignored by serious journalists, the less said the kinder to him. How he felt to have the very serious Kelly next to him, asking Gillard the questions van Onselen vowed he wouldn’t, I’d pay good money to know. His reputation over these past three days have taken a hammering he’ll find hard to repair”
Even Fairfax covered the story and IMHO this is the big question “But if you don’t buy the claims Pickering is peddling about Ms Gillard when she was a Slater & Gordon lawyer acting for her then lover, Bruce Wilson – an alleged embezzler of Australian Workers Union funds – why hasn’t she done anything to stop his vitriolic missives?

I have already put a link in the post to the SMH story. I know you are a Pickering fan but your defence of him is not strong. You are splitting hairs at best on a side issue. Others in the comment section who have seen the Peter van Onselen show have been very critical of him. Let’s move on.

I have to say I’ve been following Larry Pickering on facebook, but as his stories turned to sex, lies and innuendo’s I stopped bothering..also the cartoons with Gillard waving and wearing strapons is not my idea of clever humour. I stopped laughing at that sort of thing in year 7 or so, from memory.

At first I thought his page was a confirmation of the kangaroo court and he does have a lot of followers which, I suppose, does get the whole sordid story out there. I have realised since, that Pickering’s posts are, in no way, comparable to this site.

That said, he does seem to have gotten the story ‘out there’ ….having a facebook page helps I suppose.

I first heard of the Kangaroo Court on a forum and only recently heard of Pickering’s take on the whole affair.

Whatever, everytime I read about Gillard’s past it never fails to astound and shock me that such a corrupt and evil person could be the PM of my country. She is no better than the likes of Mugabe and Amin..and we claim to be an enlightened and informed population!

I have seriously grown to loathe Labor and all it stands for…my father would roll over in his grave if he knew all this, a coalmining man and a staunch unionist from the old days.
🙁

I am on your wavelength when you say it never fails to astound and shock you that such a corrupt person could be the PM of this country.The same goes for many others in the Govt. It really is hard to comprehend!

Given that the Govt;is so unpopular and is looking at a huge electoral defeat,surely quite a few MP’s will bail out in advance of the election.

I am hoping the Gillard/AWU affair will get a good airing after Mike Smith’s address in Sydney today.

Dear oh dear. Shane, you are usually so logical. What has happened to you today? Someone has a story that so far has been corroborated substantially by your own posts and, Styant and in yesterday’s Australian but because the writer has allegedly been fraudulent in the past their claims carry no weight?
So, do you check the background of everyone who posts information? You havent posted anything on this subject for ages. Instead you wish to dwell on some rubbish about a Liberal own goal? You are an expert in those. Gillard is now under the pump, partly because of Pickering. She cannot escape the words of Styant, nor the transcription of her interview so whats the problem? You dont like Pickering huh? well we get that. Lets just get on with getting rid of the person who has been careful not to present herself to us for teh highest office in the land, instead of dwelling on someone scamming some horse gamblers.

Pickering is not helping bring Gillard to account. He is helping save her by discrediting the whole story which you seem to not understand. And his claims do not carry weight because of all the lies and sleaze in them which I have pointed out some. Do you think his own fraud scams were never going to raised? Off course they were. Better now than at a later date which would have helped Gillard more.
You say “Someone has a story that so far has been corroborated substantially by your own posts” Well I have not written all the lies and sleaze that Pickering has.

Ho Hum…There is no question that some of the accusations ( and substantiated by the ex Slater and Gordon partner in the US) levelled at Gillard have a degree of truth awaiting to be officially revealed. As a previous writer mentioned, if there is a smidgen of truth in any of these accusations, Gillard certainly will not go to court,,I rest my case , Your Honor

I just watched Gillard on tv being interviewed by whoever that weak kneed reporter was! she fixed him with her death stare and he mumbled off!! what a useless media we have in this country nowadays!

He had a chance to try and get something out of her but he’s a gutless wonder…why is the media so scared of her? begs belief! yes, I know she had Michael Smith and Glen Milne sacked..that alone astounds me! but do the rest of the media have to be so lacking in conviction and grit?

@ Yopes..Pickering is getting it out there…but the silly way he’s presenting it is just…well..silly! he’s turned it into some weird Mills & Boon story..no idea why. In my opinion it detracts from the facts..and the facts are quite sordid enough without all that other rubbish.

I don’t find this story funny, I find it scary and disgusting..Pickering is turning it into some silly soap opera, there’s no need, so I’m struggling to understand his reasons for this. Will people continue to believe the whole saga..or will they just turn off because of the stupid way he’s presenting it.

Susan, Gillard talks non stop, and short of thumping the desk and telling her to shut up, the interviewer hadn’t a chance ! She uses all her ex lawyer skills to stump any questions. Pickering has made a farce of his investigations.

GILLARD SAID SHE WILL IGNORE THE WEBSITE MAKING THE ALLEGATIONS BECAUSE WHATEVER SHE SAID THEY WOULD CONTINUE.

THE OBVIOUS ANSWER TO THAT REMARK IS, THEN
WHY DON’T YOU TAKE LEGAL ACTION, WITH YOUR POWER AND FINANCE YOU COULD STOP THEM WITH A WRIT.
IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR THEN BRING THE MIGHT OF THE LAW DOWN ON THE VILLIANS MAKE THESE ALLEGATIONS.

JULIA GILLARD YOU CANNOT ISSUE A WRIT AS IT WOULD OPEN A CAN OF WORMS THE LIKES WE HAVE NOT SEEN IN AUSTRALIA,UNTIL YOU ADDRESS THESE ACCUSATIONS YOU WILL (IN MODERN PARLANCE ) HAVE TO SUCK IT UP.\

“Upon the Slater & Gordon partnership learning of what has been described as the AWU/Bruce Wilson allegations in August 1995, it conducted an internal legal review The review found nothing which contradicted the information provided by Ms Gillard at the time in relation to the AWU/Bruce Wilson allegations and which she has stated consistently since the allegations were first raised. In September 1995 Ms Gillard took a leave of absence from Slater & Gordon in order to campaign for the Senate.”

From the Nick Styant-Browne (.(former partner in Slater & Gordon) Statement as published in The Weekend Australian.

“the firm’s probe included a confidential formal interview with the Prime Minister – then an industrial lawyer – on September 11, 1995, which was “recorded and transcribed”. Mr Styant-Browne, now a Seattle-based lawyer, said the partnership “took a very serious view of these and other matters and accepted her resignation”.

Which statement is correct? This could probably be answered by Andrew Grech simply making public the “recorded and transcribed” interview with Gillard.

Should anyone choose to sue, this is definitely a document that would be required to be produced under discovery !

With regard to Pickering’s involvement, the best thing I can say is that more people may know about it now. His involvement may muddy the water for a while but IMO there are enough people of integrity pursuing it now to override any possible long-term detrimental damage.

Shane, I think LP’s site has been shut down because of the deplorable language and anti Semite comments made by some of his followers. One of the so called face book friends goes by the name of (deleted), and for LP to not block these sick comments is not a nice reflection on LP. And (deleted) is not the only one, and as you say, facts are facts and that is all that should be considered.
I am not convinced that, in setting up a slush fund, Gillard was not doing any more than what her legal firm had done in the past into complying to their clients wishes.
And one question begs, in my mind, if it was a slush fund when she set it up, was she aware that it was anything else, but that.
I think she is being loyal to Labor and the unions by not rating on the whole lot of them,
her loyalty should be to all Australians, we gave her the top job, but it is up to her, I guess.

(Moderator. I have deleted the names out out even though they are only Facebook names.)

Hi Terry. If the statement of Nick Styant-Browne is correct, a critical question Gillard has to answer is why she did not open a file at the firm to establish the association which enabled the Bank accounts for the “slush” fund to be opened and from which it was alleged the misappropriations took place over the next three years. Her answer to the firm’s probe was that “she could not recall at the time any reason why a file was not opened”. It has been stated elsewhere a dedicated P.O Box was set up to receive the association’s mail.

Given that (according to the affidavit of Ian Cambridge) the existence of the association and the various Bank accounts and apparent fraud was only discovered when in 1995 a builder sent an account direct to the AWU for whom Slater & Gordon acted. Who then, and under what authority instructed Gillard to set up an association under such circumstances that it was kept secret from the firm’s main client, the AWU and it’s principal officers.

It seems inconceivable that if she drew up the rules for the association as is suggested, that it would have allowed signatories to withdraw monies ostensibly banked for the AWU, to be used for their own personal purposes.

Aside from the legal implications of all that, in the circumstances, the fact that she was also self-admittedly in a relationship with one of the signatories to accounts the firm’s main clients were unaware of. had a complaint been made to the Law Council about the obvious conflict of interest, Gillard would have been in grave danger of being struck off the Roll,

Just one more thought. If a client wanted a solicitor to set up and incorporate an association, IMO that at the very least, that solicitor in order to give the best and proper advice, would ask what the association was for, how any funds were to be used, what restrictions would need to apply to anyone having access to funds and most importantly if it was for a union, was the setting up of such an asociation allowed under the Union’s rules!

Fair go hillbilly,
Who do you think instructed her, maybe none other than the AWU State Secretary, Bruce Wilson, is that high enough?
It all only came to light cause Wilson didn’t pay the bills, he was such a crook, that maybe Julia paid him, and he pocketed the money, maybe that’s why the builder went to the AWU.
It could be that, all that all she did wrong, was to not open a file, but surely Slater & Gordon have got a file on the matter, otherwise why interview her over it. I’m sure they opened a file when the fraud became obvious.
If the builder had not gone to the AWU, or sent invoices which ended up in the wrong hands, the whole matter would still be under the Slater & Gordon carpet.
Wilson would have got away with it. Beggars belief why the union hasn’t gone after him. If he didn’t get caught he could be the minister for industrial relations now.

Terry, I’m not necessarily disagreeing with anything you’re saying but you ask “Who do you think instructed her, maybe none other than the AWU State Secretary, Bruce Wilson, is that high enough?”

At this stage we don’t know if that was high enough and one would need to know the AWU rules to determine that. It’s one of the key questions to be answered.

An interesting update: Mr Styant-Browne said yesterday that he stood by the article and the claims made. “I think what I have said speaks for itself.

“And I am not aware of any denial by the PM or her spokesperson of any specific allegation about what she said in the Slater & Gordon internal interview,” he told The Daily Telegraph.

In light of that and other information already on public record, I’ll be working today (as no doubt will many others) on collating a list of questions and/or allegations that should be put to Gillard and answered if she wants to clear these matters up.

Hillbillly – I have a few more questions you might consider adding to your list.

Slater & Gordon are now busily trying to muddy the waters and deflect attention from their own nefarious activities, more than happy to focus all responsibility on Gillard (not that she doesn’t deserve to answer for her allegedly criminal conduct and absolute lack of moral and ethical principles).

1. We are told S&G provided the mortgage for the purchase of the Melbourne house in Blewitt’s name. The AWU (as an entity) was the S&G client, not an individual who happened to work for them. I would be astonished if any law firm I ever engaged provided a mortgage for any employee of mine.

2. We are told that when the AWU discovered the fraud, they slapped a caveat on the property in question. S&G did the conveyancing on the sale of the house. The caveat was ignored and the funds were dispersed without the AWU’s knowledge. How is this legally possible?

3. We are told when the house was sold, the funds were NOT paid to Blewiit, the legal owner of the property, but to a third party (presumably Wilson). How is that legally possible?

4. What role did Gillard have in …
a) Securing the mortgage for the purchase of the house?
b) Negating a legal caveat which had been issued against the title?
c) Diverting the sale proceeds from the rightful owner/or owners – also to whom were those funds paid, upon whose instruction and by whose hand?

Slater & Gordon have a lot of questions to answer but nobody is asking the right questions.

A conveyancing clerk or paralegal does not get to choose to whom such funds are dispersed without appropriate instruction which would be on file for the property sale. While Gillard could offer no acceptable reason for failing to open a file for S&G’s major client (being the AWU) in these matters, what is S&G’s excuse in failing to account for ignoring a caveat and paying sale proceeds to other than the rightful property owners?

By the way, if no file existed for Gillard’s work for the AWU reps Wilson and Blewitt, how did S&G bill either the AWU or Wilson/Blewitt for her services?

If we need to work with a common criminal to make the country a better place we have lost the plot. The reality is the way things look Gillard only has one exit door and that is for her to blame Pickering and attack his credibility which is easy to do. She was even trying to do it to some degree in the TV interview today. If the heat is turned up on her more she will try it even more and it might work. Pickering is a joke and needs to be outed now so he does not do too much damage.

Shane, it’s a bit of a stretch to suggest blaming Pickering is Gillard’s only exit. Actually it’s a joke and it’s creeping up on you the longer you protest about Pickering.

Who has done the hard yards here is not the point and neither is the credibility of those who have posted the story on the net. I’m not even sure if Pickering has tried to take all the credit and before you start, I’m not his fan or his defender.

We should all be grateful that the net has provided the opportunity to keep the politicians honest and just get on with it. Squabbling amongst ourselves diminishes all our efforts. That’s it for me until some real news breaks!

Treeman you totally missed the point. Julia Gillard has spent 16 years refusing to defend her actions in the AWU fraud. With the media heating up on her at some stage she will have to. What she will do is attack the credibility of everyone involved including Pickering for his reporting. Pickering has no credibility and is a weak link that we do not need.

He has done nothing but trash the story and is back up to his scamming ways. Where was he six months ago or twelve months ago? His dodgy history was always going to come out and it is better now than later when it might help Gillard as she comes under more pressure to respond and as I said she will go on the attack. Pickering is a liability not a help.

Michael Pascoe in the SMH has even done a story today titled “Larry Pickering – the conman stalking Gillard”. Pascoe even referenced this site. But Pascoe new about Pickerings history first hand and had reported on it years ago. I have updated the post with a link to the Pascoe story at the bottom.

Unless Gillard takes positive steps to demonstrate her innocence in the AWU corruption matter,it will continue to be lead in her saddlebags,Pickering or no Pickering.
I am with Veritas;stop the slanging.

She needs to defend a charge against her. Until such a charge is made she is only under a moral obligation to “demonstrate” her innocence. Morality has proven not to be a strong suit with her so she need do nothing. She will never be charged.

18 months on. Pickering silent, no charges, a case being dragged out for all its worth before it even gets near a trial, and Gillard being head-hunted by globalist think-tanks (Brookings). Hate to say it but this was all eminently predictable.

Pickering also did a hardcore cartoon of Bligh last year. One of his odious followers spammed it all over the place, and a friend of mine who got it in her inbox was genuinelydistressed by it. There are really no words for how low this scumbag is, and if Abbott and Newscorp want to get into bed with hom, more fools they.

Hi Shane. I have collated the allegations on which Gillard was quizzed after S & G’s 1995 internal probe, the existence of which former partner Nick Styant-Browne made known through “The Australian” over the last couple of days. It is published on Andrew Bolt’s thread “AWU scandal – the questions Gillard must answer” on the 4th page of comments.

If you like, and it causes you no problem, I can repost it here for your readers.

One other thing. it now appears what you feared is happening. Pickering’s credibility is being attacked and used by her friendly media to try and excuse Gillard or at least deflect some of the heat!
.
Cheers.

Update hot off the air (7-50pm). On Souhern Cross T.V (7) News it just said Julia Gillard could lose her job within weeks over queries about her departure from Slater & Gordon.

Billy,
Checked out your post on bolt, you keep opening the can, that little bit more.
The only thing that I disagree with is, your last paragraph, where you describe a conflict of interest. Wilson was the client’s representative, that’s why he got away with the fraud, and who was the client? The AWU. And maybe, when you scratch off the scab, we may find much, much more.
Well Done.

Hi again Shane I have just listened to the startling podcast on 2GB of Ben Fordham speaking to Michael Smith. If you haven’t done so, make it a must to do so. It’s sensational and I can’t see anyway possible Gillard will survive Michael’s fully documented revelations..

I listened, and all it did was lower my pre pay account.
No new facts, just the same old rehash.
Billy, let me say, you are flogging a dead horse,
Howes? Shorten? Rudd?
There will come a time, when the rats, rat on rats.
I wonder who will be first.
Cheers Terry

Sorry Terry, Not in the nature of this old beast to stop and IMO I think you may have pronounced that horse dead a bit prematurely! When it revives, it’s likely to kick the hell out of a lot of other union and Party luminaries over their involvement.
As Michael Smith says, the story is alli n the documents,
Have enjoyed chatting with you. Cheers

You’re right, it’s becoming all about Pickering. Just caught the end about this on Sunrise, so it’s permeating the MSM, but losing credibility from his involvement. If I didn’t know better, I’d say Pickering is running interference for Gillard to give her a way out. She will discredit him and walk away from the whole affair. Again.

You have it in one Twodogs. Disinformation and message control in action. Everything we see on TV and old mainstream news need to be viewed through the filter of mistrust. Thats why we should be making sites like this our new Mainstream Media and leave the old media behind in the dirt.

Gotta wonder what’s going on behind all the smoke eh? Usually when there’s a lot of noise and noise-making (like now) there’s something quite significant happening behind that curtain of smoke and razzmatazz. All this hoo-har which has the attention of the nation at the moment is probably nothing more than a draw card to get our collective minds off what is really going on. There’s some pretty good actors in high places in this country.. too high for Logies and the such-like…

Your list of questions are the ones i have written down for myself (Not all) I just cannot understand, that you and I are able to think of them, why not the journo’s with the big names? You are so right Shane, I also felt that S & G and
Peter Gordon are trying to close this down, however I think it has gone too far
We need the answers to your question, but how?

I looked at question-time yesterday and just cannot believe that this Thomson and Gillard are allowed to make fools of us. That is what i feel they are doing, insulting us the Australian people..

Are Larry Pickering and Andrew Bolt (and company) simply stooges for the Labor party? If comments and/or insinuations are made by dirty mud-raking etc, is that a ploy for the Labor party to shut up the critics and silence this multi-headed monster once and for all? Is this a clever (as in slimy type clever) way of dealing with a skeleton in the closet that could cost them the next election?

Hi Black Swan. Apologies. just found your post and you’re right. S & G do have a lot of questions to answer. Some of your points are answered by the following. It is apparent that Gillard was not acting for the AWU when she took on the work her boyfriend Wilson requested her to do for him, did the work pro bono and concealed from most of her partners the fact that she was acting for him outside her work for the AWU – the obvious reason she did not open a file.. That’s one of the reasons she was “asked” to resign.

This will give you many details of the 19/11/96 affidavit of Ian Cambridge and the Stat Dec of Bob Kernohan when they were tabled in Victorian Parliament. Cambridge notes he had the fraudulent accounts he’d discovered frozen but was amazed when Maurice Blackburn solicitors to whom AWU had switched, had the funds released and Cambridge believed improperly distributed.

Thanks Billy – I’m prone to asking rhetorical questions. So many people these days are told ‘what’ to think, not ‘how’ to think.

It is apparent that S&G had nothing to do with Gillard’s activities on the fraudulent accounts – it was simply a matter of a union thug whose girlfriend had the legal nouse to set up the scam where (as Mike Smith’s evidence tells us) Wilson had previously failed in his bid to incorporate the phoney association. She was not “young and naive” or acting for and on behalf of any law firm or their client – as architect of the applications and accounts, she was complicit in the fraud and profited from it, directly and indirectly.

As for Maurice Blackburn – bloody hell!! What do lawyers have to do these days before the law or their own regulatory bodies take action against them? If such action hinges entirely on complaints made, then these union characters are ALL complicit in defrauding their membership of millions. Failure to act to retrieve the stolen monies makes them ALL equally culpable IMHO.

As the extent of the incestuous and criminal nature of this web of Socialist/Marxist characters becomes more apparent by the day, there is little doubt that our government and its administration is riven by corruption – on all fronts.

BTW, I agree with other comments – Pickering is a classic straw man – burn him and the problem disappears in a puff of smoke. Just wondering what his price is. The Pickerings of this world don’t do ‘nuttin for nuttin’.

Your so right black swan! and a value on this site. As Mike Smith said the “cover up” of this whole affair is more remarkable than the crime that occurred. No Doubt Pickering will be part of this “cover up” in some way, shape and form!

G’day Curious – as you say; it’s the extent of the cover-up which will incriminate most of them. As Nixon and his henchmen found out – it wasn’t the Watergate break-in which caused the greatest outrage, it was the cover-up which saw so many of them doing serious jail time.

I believe that, as in Nixon’s case, the ‘system’ will not allow criminal prosecution of any holder of such high office as it will mean the Office itself would lose authority and respect, which can’t be allowed to happen.

For that reason, I don’t believe any Royal Commission into either the AWU or Heiner Affairs will ever see a public prosecutor pursue criminal charges against any of these reptiles – and they know it.

Deny, deny, obfuscate, deflect blame and cast aspersions against your challengers, then deny some more. That’s how they operate – and then they’ll all retire from public view on their fat pensions and perks for life.

So much personal attack…so little substance, and none of it answers the legitimate questions.
Julia Gillard has an established history of falsehood and the belief that you only have to be accountable for what you get called on…so decent, thinking people who do not have to shout are calling on her to answer. And it doesn’t matter how you colour it, just like Lance Armstrong, if you do not answer it you are probably guilty!

Pickerings high volume traffis which shut down his website must have slowed up! He is back online going hard on the Islamists. What is this bloke up to? I am speculating here but the impression I am getting is their is people out their who want a world war! Christians against Muslims? The pot is definitley been stirred! Is that the reason behind the boat people? To bring the war to Australias shores?

The law(s) here in Australia are based on the Judeo/ Christian Bible. By bringing in Muslims with their law(s) (Sharia etc) based on Islam and the Koran (Q’ran etc) the One World Government proponents and protagonists will eventually stir the pot exactly as you say. When all hell (literally) breaks loose, the OWG will already have a ‘solution’ to the problem and will introduce the laws they want. In the mean time they will also wipe out a fair portion of the population consisting of both Christian and Muslims.. which is one of their goals. Neat one eh?

How do you know that “high volume traffis which shut down his website”. Pickering told you that and you believe his lies? Him saying his site is under attack is one of the lies he uses to promote his site. And lets stay on topic.

Shane I don’t believe his lies as much as you do! I was been sarcastic as I know it is crap. I know Pickering has an agenda and it is probably just money. I find it hard NOT to look at the big picture and probably go “off topic” that way. I would just like to ask Pickering the question – What is motivating him to do storys on the Islamists?-

Pickering has not asked for donations, so if you are right, he must be looking for bigger fish than his blog readers. (I do note he is selling his calendar)
However, his racy stories and lewd cartoons have interested a lot of people in the activities of Julia Gillard, and many of these are people are those who might never read a political coment at other times.

What he does is run a betting software scam where he rips people off tens of thousands of dollars, some a lot more. A month or so ago he was asking people to sign up to get cheap electricity or no price increase where they gave their details and phone number etc. He would have used that information for his call centre for the betting scam. Watch the video where he refuses to answer questions in relation to his latest fraud and theft just like Julia Gillard refuses to answer questions on the AWU fraud.

You say “his racy stories and lewd cartoons have interested a lot of people in the activities of Julia Gillard” You are right, there are lot of perverts out there. But he has helped Gillard and turned many more people off from the story.
Supporting Pickering is supporting Gillard and also helping Pickering rip people off.

Follow this site via Email

Enter your email address and click on the follow button below to follow this website and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 4,367 other subscribers

Email Address

If you would like to support this site it would be greatly appreciated if you make a donation. Click on the button below to donate via PayPal or go to the donation page above for other options. Thank you for your support.